The ancient Israelites did not keep the festivals very well. Some aspects of the festivals were not required during the wilderness wanderings. Many festivals were ignored for decades and restored briefly by a zealous leader, only to be abandoned by the next generation. It was impractical for most Israelites to attend every sacred assembly, since the Sabbath, for example, occurred weekly and there was only one authorized meeting place for the entire nation. Most Israelites would have simply stayed home for most of those assemblies. The agricultural festivals would have less meaning in sabbatical years, when there was no cultivation. And if the law was read only on sabbatical years at Tabernacles, it would be easy for people to forget what it said.

But by the time of Jesus, the festivals were being observed regularly at Herod's temple. Although some Jews may have been lax about festival observance, others were faithful to the terms of the covenant. Scribes and Pharisees helped keep people aware of the festivals. Synagogues had been built, and the law was taught weekly.

Jesus went to the festivals, although there is no evidence that he journeyed to Jerusalem for every festival in every year. When he was an infant in Egypt, for example, he probably did not — nor was it expected of Jews who lived there. After he moved back to Nazareth, his family went to Jerusalem every Passover season (Luke 2:41), so Jesus would have been familiar with the sacrificial rituals. Assuming that Joseph died and Jesus became head of the family, he would have brought Passover lambs to be sacrificed in Jerusalem.

Jesus taught during Passover seasons (John 2:13, 23; 6:4; 11:55). His most famous Passover was his last; he instituted a new commemoration (Matthew 26:26-29) and then he himself was sacrificed as our Passover lamb (John 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:7).

Jesus taught during Tabernacles (John 7:2-14), including its last day (verse 37). Although he taught during the festivals, he did not specifically comment on their meaning. He taught about living waters, for example, but he did not say that his message had anything to do with the festivals. Rather, it was about the Holy Spirit and faith in Jesus (verses 38-39).

Jesus also kept Hanukkah, the Festival of Dedication (John 10:22).

There is only one festival that the Lord himself commanded Christians to observe. ``Do this in remembrance of me,'' he said at his last meal (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24). He told his disciples to commemorate his suffering and death by sharing bread and wine. This is a clear command, and we will return to this commanded observance at the end of this paper. First, we will examine some scriptures relevant to other festivals. 

Festivals in the early church

The new covenant was made and ratified on a festival day (Passover); the guarantee of the covenant was also given on a festival (Pentecost).

The early church, composed entirely of Jewish Christians, continued to keep the festivals. They were assembled in one place on Pentecost (Acts 2:1) — but that is not unusual, since they often met together for prayer (Luke 24:53; Acts 1:14). On Pentecost, they were sitting in a ``house,'' not necessarily in the temple (Acts 2:2).

The next mention of a festival is in Acts 12:3-4. Herod arrested Peter during the Festival of Unleavened Bread, intending to prosecute him after the Passover season. Although the church probably kept these festivals, these verses do not tell us that; the festivals are mentioned simply to tell us what time of year this happened. This passage is neither a command nor an example. The mere mention of a festival does not imply a command for its observance (cf. John 10:22). The Festival still existed in Peter's day, and it still exists today, just like Hanukkah does, but its existence does not imply that we are required to observe it.

The next mention is Acts 18:21 (in the Majority or Byzantine texts; other Greek texts do not have this passage). Paul was debating with Jews in the synagogue at Ephesus (verse 19). They wanted him to stay longer, but he refused, saying, ``I must by all means keep this coming feast in Jerusalem'' (NKJ). Paul probably kept the festivals, just as he kept Jewish customs such as cutting his hair after a vow (Acts 18:18) and participating in purification rituals at the temple (Acts 21:26). Just because he did something does not mean that we have to follow his specific example. Actually, if we must literally follow all specific biblical examples set by both Jesus and Paul, then it would be necessary to observe the festivals in Jerusalem.

Paul could have kept the festival in Ephesus if he wanted to (1 Corinthians 16:8; Acts 16:13). Although Deuteronomy required festivals to be kept in Jerusalem, Paul didn't have to go there; the Deuteronomic requirement was not deemed applicable to Jews who lived outside of the Promised Land. However, he may have wanted to be in Jerusalem because there would be a large crowd of people to preach to. The text doesn't tell us his motive.

Paul sailed from Philippi after the Festival of Unleavened Bread (Acts 20:6). This verse, like 12:3-4, simply tells us when this happened; it does not say that Christians kept the festival, nor does it command us to. Similarly, Acts 20:16 tells us that Paul wanted to be in Jerusalem by Pentecost. Although Paul probably planned to keep the festival in Jerusalem, the text does not tell us that he did; it simply tells us when he wanted to arrive. He could just as easily have kept the festival with the Ephesian church if he wanted to.

Acts 27:9 tells us that sailing was dangerous after ``the Fast,'' referring to the Day of Atonement. This text does not say anything about Christians observing this day (although they may have); it is simply a chronological marker in the story. However, would Luke's gentile readers have understood this terminology? Does it imply that the readers were themselves observing the Fast? Not necessarily. Since gentile churches were often associated with synagogues, the readers could have known when the Fast was because they knew when the Jewish festivals were.²

Paul commended the Thessalonians for becoming imitators of the churches in Judea (1 Thessalonians 2:14). Did this involve festival-keeping? Not necessarily. The churches in Judea observed various Jewish customs, and we see in Acts 15 and Galatians 2 that they had many traditions that weren't binding on gentiles. If the Thessalonians were imitating everything the Judean churches did, their example isn't authoritative for us today. Actually, the context of 1 Thessalonians 2:14 tells us the way in which the Thessalonians were imitating the Judeans: They accepted the gospel as the word of God (verse 13) and were willing to accept persecution from their countrymen (verse 14b). 

1 Corinthians 5:7-8

``Let us keep the Festival,'' Paul told the Corinthian Christians (1 Corinthians 5:8). Some have taken this to be a command to observe the Festival of Unleavened Bread, but this is not what the passage teaches. First, let us note the context:

In verses 1-5, Paul tells the Corinthians to put a sinful brother out of their fellowship. Then in verse 6, he writes, ``Don't you know that a little leaven works through the whole batch of dough?'' This proverb is similar to a modern one: ``One rotten apple can ruin the whole bunch.'' If Paul had written that, he would have been comparing rot to sin, indicating that rot must be removed before it spreads. In a similar metaphor in verse 6, Paul is comparing yeast to sin — and sin, if it's not corrected, can spread through the whole community.

When Paul says, ``Get rid of the old yeast'' (1 Corinthians 5:7), he is still speaking metaphorically about disfellowshipping the sinful brother, not telling them to get rid of physical leaven. ``Yeast'' is still being used as a figure of speech for the sinful person.

When Paul says that the Corinthians are already unleavened — that they are a ``new batch without yeast'' — he is comparing the people to a lump of dough. He is not saying that their homes are deleavened, or that yeast has been removed from their diets. It is the Christian community itself that is, figuratively, the new batch of dough.³ This evidence in the text tells us that Paul is speaking metaphorically.

Further evidence that Paul is speaking spiritually is the last part of verse 7: The Corinthians are to put out spiritual leaven, and they are already unleavened, because Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed. They are spiritually cleansed by the atoning death of Jesus Christ, and they therefore ought to eliminate sin from their community. Christ's sacrifice on the cross is not a logical reason to put leaven out of our homes for one week, but it is a logical reason to put sin out throughout the year.

Paul was not addressing the topic of physical leaven. If he had wanted to forbid physical leaven, he would have said, ``Put the leaven out, for the law has commanded us to.'' Christ's crucifixion did not have anything to do with physical leaven, but it does remove spiritual leaven. It is the Corinthian Christian community, not their homes or their diets, that is said to be unleavened. Christ has declared them to be holy (1 Corinthians 1:2; Hebrews 10:10), so they ought to act like it. Sanctification is a process as well as an initial event (Hebrews 10:14).

Paul is telling them to put blatant sin out of their fellowship so they can be a group of people who live in holiness, since they have been sanctified or declared holy by the sacrifice of Christ. They had leaven (i.e., the sinful member) in their midst, but Christ had made them unleavened (forgiven), so they had the logical duty to put the sinful member out of their fellowship. Paul is teaching the Corinthians to live up to what they already were. They were already cleansed; now they needed to continue to remain free from sin and corruption.

Paul says that Christ is our Passover. However, Jesus' sacrifice has dramatically changed the way the Passover is to be observed; it has also changed the way we strive to be unleavened, as Paul brings out in verse 8.

``Therefore'' — because Christ has been sacrificed for us — ``let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast...'' Does this imply that we can keep the festival with new leaven? Of course not. Paul isn't talking about physical leaven, or else he wouldn't need the word ``old.'' Paul is contrasting the old lifestyle of sin with the new Christian lifestyle of holiness. Paul is telling the Corinthians to keep the festival in a new way, concerned about sincerity and truth. The old leaven he's talking about is clearly identified as ``malice and wickedness'' — that's the sort of thing we must put out. That's what the festival had pictured all along.

Now, Christians are to keep⁴ the festival with unleavenness (the word ``bread'' is not in the Greek). Again, Paul is not talking about being physically deleavened — he clearly says that the unleavenness he is talking about is ``sincerity and truth.'' We are to keep the festival in the new spiritual way, by eliminating sin. Christianity is a continuous festival, a celebration of the salvation we have in Christ. The festival symbolism, eliminating leaven, is fulfilled by the elimination of guilt and sin through the atoning work of Christ and his sanctifying work in our lives. For Christians, sincerity and truth characterize our complete devotion to and worship of our Lord and Savior.

If we are circumcised in heart, we are not required to submit to the physical rite of circumcision, since we have fulfilled the spiritual principle that the physical rite pictured. Likewise, when we live in sincerity, truth and holiness, we are not required to physically deleaven our homes, since we have already fulfilled the spiritual meaning that the physical ritual pictured.

Could the Corinthian church understand Paul's symbolism if they were not actually observing the festivals? Yes. They could understand Jesus' role as a Lamb of God without killing Passover lambs, and they could understand the spiritual fulfillment of sacrifices without killing any animals. Since the church in Corinth began in a synagogue, and there were Jews in Corinth, even the gentile Christians could have understood the allusions without actually keeping the festival in the old covenant way. Some of the Christians in Corinth may have even kept the festivals in an old covenant way, but that in itself does not indicate that the festivals are required for all Christians. 

Colossians 2:16-17

Colossians 2:16 says, ``Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.'' First, we should note the connecting word ``therefore'' — it links verse 16 with the previous verses. Because Christ has circumcised us spiritually, forgiven us and given us new life, for that reason we should not allow anyone to judge us regarding various rituals.

Apparently the Colossian heretics taught that certain customs were required, and Paul is telling the Christians that they should ignore the heretics' criticisms because of what Christ had done for them. The heretics' teachings were apparently a combination of Jewish customs and ascetic customs. The Christians were eating and drinking things that the heretics disapproved of (perhaps meat and wine), and the Christians' behavior on festivals wasn't what the heretics said was necessary. Perhaps the Christians were observing these days with less rigor than the heretics demanded, or perhaps they were not observing these days at all.⁵

Does Paul imply that the Christians were doing everything mentioned in verse 16 (eating, drinking and observing days)? No. By including the words ``or with regard to'' in the midst of his list, Paul grammatically separates food and drink from the observance of days; he may be indicating a difference in the way the Christians were being criticized for food and drink as opposed to the way they were criticized for something in respect to new moons, festivals and Sabbaths. They may have been doing the former, but not the latter.

The Greek words translated ``with regard to'' literally mean ``in part,'' but there is no evidence that the Christians were observing only part of the festivals (e.g., all but the sacrifices). The words are a Greek idiom meaning with regard to, with respect to, in connection with, concerning, etc. The Christians were not to allow others to judge them in connection with or regarding what they did on a Jewish festival. But how could they stop other people's attitudes? They could not; all they could do is not to let the criticisms cause them to change their behavior as if necessary for salvation, and that is probably what Paul meant. Christian behavior should not be determined by external pressures.

The clearest point in the whole passage is that we shouldn't let people judge us regarding these things — not other Christians, not even people in our own fellowship. Salvation doesn't depend on our observance of dietary rules or specific festivals. Christ is the judge, and we are to obey him rather than human traditions.

Does this verse imply that we can be saved whether we keep these days or not? Yes. That harmonizes well with the principle Paul gave in another situation (Romans 14:4-6). Some people regard the day as special to the Lord, and others regard it as optional, also basing their belief on their desire to obey the Lord. Each should be fully convinced, bringing every thought into submission to the Lord, but we are not to judge each other, since Christ is our Lord and our Judge. We are not to let others judge us (i.e, pressure us to change our behavior because of their opinions), and we are not to judge others regarding food and drink and festivals.

Festivals, new moons and Sabbaths are shadows pointing to the reality, which is Christ (Colossians 2:17).⁶ The tabernacle and laws of sacrifices were also shadows (Hebrews 8:5; 10:1). All these things had typological significance, but Christ fulfilled the symbolism of the old covenant rites.⁷ The old covenant specified holy places and holy times, but the New Testament does not label any time as ``holy.'' Just as in the case of circumcision, when we have been given the spiritual reality, we are not bound by physical worship rules.

Although Christians may observe the festivals as celebrations of various aspects of salvation, that does not make them required observances. Nothing in the New Testament says that they are required. In Colossians 2:16, the old covenant festivals are placed in the same category as new moon observances. Christ does not require us to observe them, nor does he forbid us to observe them. The festivals can be helpful if they emphasize what Christ has done for us, but they are not a required part of our new covenant relationship with God. 

Summary

The festivals were instituted by God himself, but so were the sacrifices and the tabernacle. The festivals are ``feasts of the Lord,'' but the tabernacle and sacrifices were also ``of the Lord.'' The festivals were commanded forever, but so were some of the sacrifices and so was circumcision. None of these are requirements for Christians today. The new covenant is significantly different from the old; worship requirements have been greatly transformed. The festivals are not signs or proofs of true Christianity and are not a basis for judging whether someone is in the faith.

Two festivals were instituted before Sinai, but circumcision was also instituted before Sinai, and it is not a requirement. Christians are inheritors of the covenant of promise that God made with Abraham because of his faith, and laws that were added afterwards cannot change the promise of eternal life through faith in Jesus Christ. Even the festivals commanded before Sinai were given through Moses and are part of ``the law of Moses.''⁸ They were historically conditioned, linked to the agricultural seasons of a specific nation in a specific land, linked to physical salvation and physical promises.

The festivals were commanded within the old covenant, and the terms of that covenant are not binding on Christians today. Observances instituted in the old covenant are obsolete unless we have evidence that they are also part of the new covenant. If we are to teach something as a requirement for people in a new covenant relationship with God, it must be based on the new covenant, not the old.

The prophets predicted a restoration of the festivals, but they also predicted sacrifices (e.g., Zechariah 14:20-21) and circumcision (Ezekiel 44:9). Their prophecies cannot be used to make requirements for the church in this age.

Jesus observed the Holy Days because he was born under the law, while the old covenant was still in force (Galatians 4:4). He observed old covenant customs such as participating in the sacrifice of Passover lambs, tithing to the Levites, telling cleansed people to make offerings as prescribed by Moses, etc. He also observed Hanukkah. Such examples help Christians focus on Jesus' teaching and the meaning of what he did for us. By comparison, Christians should be careful about using his example in cultural, time-bound circumstances.

The early church also observed the festivals, since the first Christians were Jewish. They also observed circumcision and other customs that were not binding on gentile believers. It was certainly permissible for Jewish believers to continue observing their traditions, but their example is not authoritative unless there is evidence that gentiles were also required to observe these festivals. God gave the Holy Spirit on one festival, but he never told us to commemorate that event with a required assembly (although many Christian churches observe Pentecost, it is by tradition rather than command); he gave the Spirit on other days, too. Later history shows a few Christians keeping the festivals, but some kept circumcision, too. Their example isn't authoritative. Our standard must be the Bible, particularly the new covenant.

Paul kept some festivals in Jerusalem, but he was away for most of them. He also kept other Jewish customs, so his example isn't automatically authoritative. If we imitate all the ways in which he lived like Jesus, we would have to be celibate traveling preachers. We need to discern which details of their lives were based on the culture they lived in, and which were based on the new life in Christ. Paul considered himself under the law of Christ, not under the law of the old covenant (1 Corinthians 9:19-21). Today, we are to obey the commands of Jesus (Matthew 28:20).

Jesus commanded a commemoration of his death, but he otherwise did not command Christians to observe any festivals. Likewise, Paul did not command gentiles to keep the festivals. In alluding to the Festival of Unleavened Bread, he spiritualized it, saying that Christians were to rejoice in sincerity and truth. And he told the Colossians to ignore what others might say regarding Jewish festivals. They were symbolic shadows, so they did not matter. The reality to which they had pointed had come. They had symbolic significance, but so did circumcision and the sacrifices. They are meaningful, but that in itself does not mean that observance is required.

Moreover, if the festivals were required, we would have to ask how many of the customs are required. Can we say that one physical custom (unleavened bread) is still required but another physical custom (bitter herbs) is not? Or we might consider that the old covenant required not only temporary dwellings, but also homemade, substandard dwellings. Can we say that one aspect of the booths is important, but the others are not? If we say that tree-branch booths are not practical in our climate, are we using human reasoning to limit our obedience?

The Israelites were told to celebrate the Feast of Ingathering with fruit, "palm fronds, leafy branches and poplars" (Leviticus 23:40). This passage tells us when the Feast should be observed. It tells us how to celebrate: with sacrifices, palm fronds, etc. It tells us who the festival is for: "native-born Israelites" (verse 42). It tells us why: the festival commemorates the beginning of the nation. It is arbitrary to insist on the dates for the festival (which appear to be based on climate in one part of the world), but ignore other details. The Bible simply doesn't tell us that one part of the passage is to be obeyed forever and the next part is temporary. If we are to accept one verse as authoritative, shouldn't we accept the next verse, too?

The simple truth is that all these are not requirements under the new covenant. They are part of ``the law of Moses'' that is not a requirement for membership in the Christian community (Acts 15). We may not understand precisely how Jesus fulfilled the symbolism of leavened loaves and other festival rituals, but we do know that in the New Testament our relationship with God is based on faith in Christ. Since we have been given salvation in him, we are already abiding by the purpose of the festivals; we have begun to experience the reality that the festivals only pointed to. The New Testament does not command them.

Although the festivals are not requirements, they can be used as opportunities to preach the gospel and worship our Savior. But we cannot make them requirements and say that people ought to risk their jobs and alienate their families in order to keep them.

Those who wish to abstain from leavened bread during that festival are free to do so, but there is no requirement to do so. We are spiritually unleavened through faith in the sacrificed Lamb of God, and there is therefore no need to physically perform that which was only a shadow of the reality.

Similarly, those who desire to fast on the Day of Atonement are free to do so, but they do not have to. It is not more righteous or holy to do so. Through his sacrificial death, Jesus Christ has already made us ``at one'' with God. At its best, the Day of Atonement is a celebration both of Christ's atoning work and of the reconciliation with God that we have been given because of his work. Although fasting can be a spiritually valuable discipline, there is no new covenant requirement to continue the old covenant practice of fasting on this particular day to acknowledge one's spiritual alienation from God. Our fast days and worship days are not determined by the Hebrew calendar, which was given to Israel alone as part of the old covenant.

Paul did not require Jewish Christians to stop practicing their customs, but he did require them not to impose those customs on gentile converts (Galatians 2:14-15). The law was a guardian that could lead us to Christ (Galatians 3:24), and if the festivals lead us to Christ, they are good. But they are not a substitute for Christ; they cannot save us. Nor are they a required addition to faith in Christ. People who keep the festivals are not better Christians than those who do not. The important thing is whether people have faith in Christ and obey him. If we have faith, we are already fulfilling the purpose of Israel's worship rules. We are saved by grace through faith, not by performance of specific old covenant customs.

Endnotes

2 If we consider what readers knew and didn't know, we would also have to consider why Mark had to explain to his readers that the Preparation Day was the day before a Sabbath (Mark 15:42). Does this mean that his readers didn't observe a preparation day? Why does John 7:2 say that Tabernacles (not just the ceremonies, but the festival itself) was a Jewish festival, as if Christians didn't keep it? These verses are not proof, but they are substantiating evidence that some Christians were not familiar with these festivals. 

3 Paul is also making a contrast between "old'' and "new," just as he does in Ephesians 4:22-25 and Colossians 3:8-14. Paul can say that the Christians have already put off the old man and put on the new man, and he can also exhort them to continue to put off old behavior and put on new. They have been declared to be new, so they should act accordingly. Because they are created anew in Christ, they are to put off lying and anger, malice and wrath, and they are to put on truth, kindness and love. Likewise in 1 Corinthians 5, Paul can say that the Christians are already spiritually unleavened, and yet should put out spiritual leaven. They should act in accordance with what they have been declared to be. 

4 The verb ``keep'' is in the present tense, which in Greek generally denotes a continuing action. Keeping the festival, in the manner Paul described, is an ongoing responsibility. 

5 It isn't likely that the heretics would advocate animal sacrifices, because Diaspora Jews did not require them, and vegetarian ascetics wouldn't, either. Perhaps the Christians were being criticized for observing days the heretics thought were unnecessary, but it isn't likely that the heretics would criticize the addition of requirements. This suggests that the Colossian Christians were not observing festivals, and the heretics were claiming that they ought to, and Paul was telling the Christians to ignore the criticisms. It is a spurious argument to ask, How could they be criticized with regard to days they were not keeping? — as seen by the fact that some people today do criticize people for not keeping these festivals. 

6 Not just part of the festival, but the entire festival is a shadow pointing to Christ. From this sentence, it is not clear whether the foods and drinks are also considered shadows. 

7 Some of Christ's work is still future, and the festivals foreshadow some future events, too, but Paul's conclusion is still that we should not let anyone judge us with respect to these days. Nor should we judge others regarding these days. 

8 Scripture does not compartmentalize Moses' writings into temporary and permanent, or core and periphery, or ethical and ritual; they are all equally part of the law of Moses, and Christians are not under obligation to that law (Acts 15). Although the rituals continue to be in inspired Scripture, their spiritual symbolism has been fulfilled, and they do not need to be physically reenacted by God's people today. Their validity has been confirmed at the same time as it has become unnecessary to perform them.

Many of the ethical rules continue to be valid, but their validity rests on the new covenant rather than the old. When a French citizen emigrates to England, he finds that many of the laws are the same, but he obeys them because he is under a new jurisdiction, not because they were enforced in the old.

Written by Michael Morrison, copyright 1995 by the author

To part 3 of this paper

Back to home page of “Study Papers About Old Testament Laws”